Ah, but I guess it's true what they say: a tiger can't change its stripes.
Republicans’ effort to outlaw infanticide of babies born after botched abortions collapsed Monday, falling victim to a Democrat-led filibuster in what could be Congress’s only chance to vote on the hot-button issue this year.
The GOP-led Senate only mustered 53 votes — seven shy of the 60 needed to overcome the Democratic filibuster. Three Democrats crossed the aisle to back the bill, while three Republicans missed the vote.
Backers said they were driven to act by recent state laws and bills they said would allow abortions up to the point of birth — and, in at least the case of one failed piece of legislation in Virginia, would have allowed a child born despite an attempted abortion to be left to die.
“It isn’t about new restrictions on abortion. It isn’t about changing the options available to women. It’s just about recognizing that a newborn baby is a newborn baby. Period,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican. He said it made him “uneasy” that such legislation was even considered controversial.
There are six Democrat U.S. Senators who have declared they are running for President in 2020. All six blocked this bill from receiving an up or down vote.
The popular Dem chanting point upon this legislation failing was something along the lines of government should not have any say in women's health care decisions. I'm not sure if these people are stupid, ignorant or engaging in gaslighting. The fact of the matter is the bill which was debated did nothing to alter the abortion laws currently on the books. It specifically addresses what happens after a woman attempts to terminate her pregnancy (i.e. the "health care" that was administered to her). This is about an actual human being who is born and thus making it a law to....y'know.....engage in life saving techniques of said human.
While leftists themselves attempt to spin this debate as conservatives looking to infringe upon women's rights, they also have willing accomplices in the media.
This was the headline (on a Politico story): “Senate defeats anti-abortion bill, as GOP tries to jam Dems.”
The smaller problem with the headline was that this bill would do nothing to stop a single abortion. It only applies to babies completely outside the mother’s body, after an attempted abortion has failed. (Also note: Politico puts quotation marks around “attempted abortion,” as if even that is a politically loaded term. Yet if a doctor attempts an abortion, but the baby is born alive, what other words could possible describe it?). This isn’t some run-of-the-mill anti-abortion bill; it’s about saving babies who by every single definition ever known to mankind are no longer fetuses, but living, breathing humans in the light of day.
The bigger problem, an unforgivable one journalistically, is that the headline sets the theme of the whole article that this bill is not an act of conscience, but a cynical ploy to “jam” Democrats. That’s the media’s rule: Every single story must paint Republicans as nasty manipulators, devoid of sincerity, ravenous for Democrats’ political blood.
For all the caterwauling the left does over their allegations of Republican politicians being bought and paid for by the National Rifle Association, they conveniently leave out how prominent pro-abortion groups like EMILYs List, Planned Parenthood and NARAL contribute to Dems multiple times more money. Apparently the vast majority of Democrats are so terrified of being left off that proverbial gravy train that they're willing to allow literal deaths to keep it coming in.
One last thing. Remember the outrage leftists conveyed over Trump carrying on an Obama era policy of alien children being separated from their parents when these families attempted to illegally enter America via the Mexican-U.S. border? Seems to ring rather hollow now, doesn't it?